Delhi High Court · 2026-03-30
COMMUNICATION COMPONENTS ANTENA INC. vs ROSENBERGER HOCHFREQUENZTECHNIK GMBH & CO. KG & ORS.
- Citation / case number
- CS(COMM)-653/2019 2026:DHC:2665
- Court
- Delhi High Court
- Petitioner
- COMMUNICATION COMPONENTS ANTENA INC.
- Respondent
- ROSENBERGER HOCHFREQUENZTECHNIK GMBH & CO. KG & ORS.
Judgment text excerpt
$~J * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on: 31st May, 2025 Pronounced on: 30th March, 2026 Uploaded on: 1st April, 2026 + CS(COMM) 653/2019 and CC(COMM) 22/2022 COMMUNICATION COMPONENTS ANTENNA INC...Plaintiff Through: Mr. Gaurav Pachnanda, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Sidhant Goel, Mr. Mohit Goel, Mr. Deepankar Mishra, Mr. Aditya Goel & Ms. Avni Goel, Advs. (M: 9716746496) versus ROSENBERGER HOCHFREQUENZTECHNIK GMBH & CO. KG .....Defendant No.1 PROSE TECHNOLOGIES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED .....Defendant No.2 ROSENBERGER ASIA PACIFIC ELECTRONIC CO., LTD. .....Defendant No.3 PROSE TECHNOLOGIES (SUZHOU) CO., LTD. ....Defendant No.4 Through: Mr. Vivek Chibb, Senior Advocate with Late Mr. Varun Sharma, Mr Manish Aryan, Mr. Nishant Rai, Ms Manisha Singh, Mr. Abhai Pandey, Ms. Mansi Gupta, Mr. Siddharth, Ms. Akhya Anand, Ms. Shivani Singh, Mr. Dhruv Tandan & Ms. Anju Agarwal, Advs. (M: 9871135752) Signature Not Verified CS(COMM) 653/2019 Page 1 of 259 Digitally Signed By:RAHUL Signing Date:01.04.2026 11:03:19 CORAM: JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH JUDGMENT Prathiba M. Singh, J. Sr. No. INDEX Para No. A. BACKGROUND OF THE PARTIES 3-8 B. FACTUAL BACKGROUND OF IN 240893 (IN’893) 9-16 C. PATENT APPLICATIONS IN FOREIGN JURISDICTIONS 17-21 D. ENFORCEMENT OF SUIT PATENT 22-38 Proceedings In CS(Comm.) 977/2016 – First Suit Proceedings In CS(Comm.) 1072/2016 - Second Suit Proceedings In CS(Comm.) 1222/2018 – Third Suit E. CASE OF THE PLAINTIFF & CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN 39-52 THE PARTIES F. PROCEEDINGS IN THE PRESENT SUIT 53-71 G. (I) SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFF 72-147 (II) PER CONTRA: SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANTS (III) REJOINDER SUBMISSIONS BY THE PLAINTIFF H. ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS 148-265 ISSUE I: WHETHER THE SUIT PATENT IN’893 IS LIABLE TO BE REVOKED? Lack of novelty